ST or leave it as 2.4S

[majordad]

Easter weekend 1988 I saw an advert for a Porsche 911 for sale. Tested it which confirmed it needed work but still bought it. I went to Lebanon with the UN in 1988/9 which paid for a kitchen and a 2.2S engine for it. Began to race and rally it in 1990 and between 1990 and 2000 did almost 200 events in it from hillclimbs to autotests to night navs to races to shows. This car was registered as a 2.4S in Feb 1972 in Italy with colour Bahia Beige and came to Ireland in 1983 with the number ZT 911. I had a big off in the West Cork Rally in 2000 which pre empted the current repairs.
So ZT 911, Bahia Beige ( an awful colour, but americans love it ) is being repaired. It had become guards red before I bought it and I changed this to blut orange in 1993. Hence my post. Do I repair it original or as an ST. There s more than mere metal and money involved here and not an amount of utter maddness too .

[hot66]

Depends what your ultiamte goal is ... if it's to keep for ever & is going to be built purely for your own pleasure build what you want .

If you see at some point in the future selling it on, rebuild as a stock 2.4S in all original spec

Persoanlly, as ST reps are becoming 10 a penny , I'd rebuild stock but with modded suspension & motor .... by dream car would be a 2.4S with hot 2.7RS motor & rear RS flares ina bright safety colour ... very much like the prototype 1972 2.7S

ask away on DDK too

[seawise]

yes, post on DDK. here you'll just get posts about it's value (in the mind of self appointed internet experts) and how you can get a GT3 for less, with buckets etc.

[majordad]

I'm not on DDK, I look in occasionally. I wonder would someone please copy my post here to there ?

[anonymous-user]

hot66 said:

dream car would be a 2.4S with hot 2.7RS motor & rear RS flares

So basically a 2.7RS then?

As it was originally a 2.4S I would personally build it as a 2.4S rather than ST, but depends what you want from it really. ST reps can be really nice too if done properly.

[anonymous-user]

2.4s narrow body - pure and so much cooler than ST or RS clone. And keep it blood orange - fab colour.

[graemel]

If it is a genuine 2.4S then I would leave it as is. From memory they made fewer 2.4S's than 2.7RS's. The 2.2S is a good engine and revier than the 2.4. In fact the 2.5ST motor is based on the 2.2S engine. But I do remember reading somewhere that the 2.5's suffer from some harmonic imbalance. That could be rubbish though.

[andy74b]

Another vote for keeping it standard. We are currently restoring a 2.4s back to original colour and spec. Really fancied a 2.8rsr style car but would have been a mistake to use the 2.4s as a donor.

[hot66]

uktrailmonster said:

So basically a 2.7RS then?

As it was originally a 2.4S I would personally build it as a 2.4S rather than ST, but depends what you want from it really. ST reps can be really nice too if done properly.

sort of .. but without the tail & with the S front bumper. Porsche did produce these before deciding to add the 'aero' and class it as an RS touring


I run a stock spec 2.4S with a little bit more power than stock and it's a fantastically fun car Once on cam it flies . Perfect car for touring europe in & also for ringing it's neck on country roads No need to modify that much beyond stock spec really. Still the most satisfying car to drive that I've owned .. the Turbo I have is fun in a different way, but it lacks that something special an S has

Edited by hot66 on Thursday 9th August 21:47